Quando Explode a Vingança

It's a shame that most people will not get to see this film on the big screen. The new print makes the film look like it was shot recently. The sound has been re- mastered also and is 90% perfect. A few of the restored scenes help the film along although they add to the already long running time. It is slightly different from the LaserDIsc version that came out a few years ago especially the end scene. However, one friend (a film reviewer) told me that it's the same version that he saw when it came out in 1972 for two weeks before it was pulled, re-titled and cut.

I have to say that this film is one of Leone's best and I now rate it above "Once Upon a Time in America". It's not an easy film and there are a few "flaws" but in a strange way it is the most human film Leone made. Coburn and Steiger both come off as real people despite the occasional lapse in accents. It's amazing how much time Leone gave to searing close-ups of the two actors and how they were able to convey so much of the story in silence. The story is very subtle and very unsubtle at the same time which can make following the film hard if you are expecting the "hello stupid" storytelling we get these days. Leone did the same thing in "Once upon a Time in the West" and "America". There's a storytelling genius here that's all the more amazing if you consider that Leone was operating out of his native language.

What makes this film stand out is the outright message Leone conveys with the story. He didn't do that with any of his other films.

A few words on the restored scenes. As with other Leone films that have undergone editing by American distributors, the removed scenes are a mixed bag. Some scenes were removed for length purposes, others for content reasons and some I suspect were removed because they were perceived as not up to the quality of the rest of the film. This was certainly the case for "The Good, The Bad & The Ugly". In "Duck, You Sucker", the restored opening helps the film's message which is probably not what the American censors though it was. The stagecoach robbery rape scene, which in the American version was edited in a way to suggest that Juan is really a gentleman thief not a rapist, is problematic unless you read it as a political comment and even then it's tough to take. The churchyard sequence, which is completely absent in the American version, is one of Leone's clumsiest scenes and it's absence didn't really affect the film. Some of it is out of focus! The ending sequence was apparently reedited by Leone after the opening in Europe and exists in several different versions over there! The version we see here is very, very long but illuminates the main characters motivations better then the American version.

Hopefully this limited re-release signals the soon arrival of a DVD version.

Update, July 2007: Finally, the DVD has been released. After watching the restored, restored version I have to add that the film really holds up. This version is identical to the screened version except for one minor, yet important difference at the very end. A crucial line from the American version has been restored.

The extras deserve some mention. First of all they all have a copyright of 2005 which indicates that the release of this DVD was delayed for some reason. The interviews are very interesting but each extra is heavily inter-cut with scenes from the film, the clips are frequently unrelated to the topic and often the same clips are repeated in each extra! You get to see James Coburn running in a field in Ireland over and over. One extra tracks the different versions that exist of this film, shows stills from scenes that Leone cut before the premier in Italy (the negatives of these particular scenes have apparently been destroyed) and leads into a rumination on the Sean/John confusion. The writer of this extra then comes to the conclusion that "Sean" isn't the James Coburn character! I don't agree at all but it's a useful extra.

A DVD to own.

Excellent action film with Steiger over-the-top but Coburn right on the money as bandit/revolutionaries in Mexico. More gunfire and explosions and less balmy confrontations than in other Leone pics. I'm stuck on a second viewing by how much of a "70s" film this is, and how much real cinematic value and interesting ideas Leone has put into the film despite its basic action-film plotline. Rumors say Malcolm MacDowell was the original lead -- very intriguing possibility. The look on Steiger's face after he finds out he's risked his life to rescue a bunch of dirty prisoners is priceless.

Coming off the triumphs of his "Man With No Name" series and his frustrations with the cutting of "The Good, The Bad & The Ugly" and "Once Upon a Time in the West," Sergio Leone directed the big budget, epic western, originally titled, "Once Upon a Time in the Revolution". Since "...West" had been released by Paramount and United Artists was releasing "...Revolution," some executive decide the rename the movie "Duck! You Sucker!" after the phrase Sean (James Coburn) uses repeatedly before blowing someone or something up with dynamite. Likely the same executive choose an advertising campaign reminiscent of "The Good, The Bad & The Ugly," creating caricatures of Sean and Juan (Rod Steiger) adding the caption "...the master of adventure, Sergio Leone". Well, I doubt many theater audiences knew who Sergio Leone was, since he was yet to be recognized as a directoral genius the equal of John Ford or Howard Hawks. Worse, the advertising implied "Duck! You Sucker! was a laugh romp, a parody of Leone's early masterpieces. This impression was made even worse when the film failed to perform. In any event, "A Fistfull of Dyanmite" was a dismal failure at the box office and Leone never made another big budget western drama.It's too bad, because "A Fistfull of Dynamite" is Leone's trueist work, his most accurate vision of life, politics and revolution. Neither Rod Steiger nor James Coburn were strongly associated with westerns, even though both played strong roles in earlier films (Steiger in "Run of the Arrow" and "Jubal," Coburn in "The Magnificent Seven" and "Ride Lonesome". Worse, Steiger's Juan looked like something of a buffoon and the movies villains were bland and underdeveloped. However, I believe this was Leone's intention: corrupt politicians and Prussian officers are pretty well interchangeable. Kill one and another pops up. This isn't a very satisfying truth, but it is truth, nonetheless. Juan is a peasant, a bandit with a large family of bandits. Sean is a Irish Republican Army terrorist, an explosives expert. In Leone's world, or at least in all his films, there are only two types of people: predators and victims. His major characters are all predators. The only thing that distinguishes his protagonists from his antagonists is that his antagonists start with a large body count and his protagonists usually spare the innocent. That works with a taut enough storyline, but "...Dynamite" covers large areas of real estate and the goal is never clear. Juan didn't plan to become a hero of the revolution, and that is small payment for his losses. When one looks at history, the rewards of revolution and warfare are never worth the sacrifices, for just as we kill one bastard, another takes his place.

I think "A Fistfull of Dynamite" largely reflects Leone's fate as well. Leone proved he was the greatest western director in less than four years with only four major films. Yet, he was hardly appreciated during his short life and only a few films after his magnificent achievement. "A Fistfull of Dynamite" is also Leone's saddest movie. A beautiful, big budget metaphor for a man's talent wasted by underappreciate film executive and smug, self-serving critics.

Coburn should have won an "Oscar" for "Dynamite." With the exception of some tabletop model trains, the effects are convincing and exciting. The color cinematography is phenomenal, clearly the equal of "Once Upon a Time in the West. The sound and music (by Ennio Morricone) is phenomenal, as usual. While not as satisfying as Leone's best films, "A Fistfull of Dynamite" is an exemplary film. I give it a "9".

With Fistful of Dyanmite (a.k.a. 'Duck, You Sucker', a.k.a. 'Once Upon a Time in the Revolution', the second part of a 'trilogy'), legendary Sergio Leone puts together something experimental, even more so than the other films in his catalog. Here he now deals with war, but he still has the crime elements of his 'dollars' films; it somehow makes a very clear cut balance between bits of comedy within the tragedy worked in the story; it isn't very brutal, but it is graphic in the genre sense of the time. It's also one of his best films, if you happen to see it within its full running time (like most of Leone's films, this suffered drastic cuts in American versions, reducing critical character points and other Leone surprises).

A Leone film, however, can only be as strong as the leads pushing it up, as in the dozens and dozens of westerns and other films that inspired Leone. Here he uses two character actors (for the most part of their careers), but indeed very good and astute ones at playing their parts. Rod Steiger, who has been in classic films like On the Waterfront and The Pawnbroker, here is slightly like a maturer version of Tuco from The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: he's still a bandit, with pillaging and beating and raping his way across the countryside, but he's also got a family to look after, who within his anti-hero heart are the most important things to him. Steiger's Juan is usually either surprised, quietly delighted, or agitated off to certain degrees. He plays this for all it's worth, but he also finds the best notes in the moments when he brings out laughs, and in the more sorrowful moments later on in the film.

There's also James Coburn, veteran of many, many films, given one of the great themes of any character in a Leone film by composer Ennio Morricone (there's some sort of instrument or distortion of one in his theme that calls for complete, unusual attention on the viewer). Coburn's Sean (err, John, depending) is a character with some ghosts, perhaps, in his past, and who unlike Juan is more interested in 'other' interests. Although Juan tries not to notice it until the sequence at Mesa Verde (which I won't reveal), Sean has been through a revolution in Ireland, and understand more or less what happens with it. He brings in Juan, after a rather strange yet hilarious encounter, into his web of revolutionary fighters, which doesn't go over to well with him at first. As their story unravels, Coburn still plays it like a pro, being the straight character to Steiger's very theatrical-like performance. He doesn't quite have the mystery an Eastwood or Bronson had in the other Leone films, but he does carry a certain quality about him that puts him in a needed place in the Leone cannon.

Speaking of which, one must not over-look how complex a film like this is in some ways. Leone was not originally the director (it went through the hands of Peter Bogdanovich and Sam Peckinpah before coming to him, coincidentally the opening scene with Juan is a cool homage to the Wild Bunch opening). Yet somehow he puts his stamp, and wonderful mark, on Fistful of Dynamite. This time more history is worked into the film- unlike the civil war acting like a harsh backdrop to the more 'fun' elements of the adventure in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, the war in this film affects the main character, and adds a serious tone to an otherwise standard genre picture.

The Steiger character, along with the audience, gets a look at a massive amount of death, or rather the images of the dead: a tower filled with soldiers blown at night, the powerful pans and camera moves across the bodies, real combat, and the suggestions of what goes into the revolution. But its not just the violence of battles that get into the film, its also the personal attitudes during the revolution- the bourgeois vs the peasants (one of Leone's masterstrokes at close-ups in montage is displayed when Juan is on the train with the near monstrous American wealthy early in the film). Leone manages to work in various and cinematic explosions, in-depth or testing close-ups, and sweeping long shots of soldiers, landscapes, and struggle.

Coming back to Ennio Morricone's score- this time, Morricone experiments with some styles of his talents. As when Leone uses a funny, almost cartoon-like, image above Sean from Juans' eyes of a 'Banco' sign (akin the a 'dollar' sign above cartoon characters), Morricone adds a church organ and choir to go along with it. There are also the uses of themes throughout the film, as in Leone's other films, that act like striking, beautiful calling cards. The opening theme is pounding; Sean's flashbacks are given the sumptuous qualities that go with the best (and worst) nostalgia; the scenes with action and suspense, though almost a little standard, still work far better than many standard score of today.

Fistful of Dynamite is entertainment on an epic scale, with a broader and somewhat deeper sub-text, and it comes out with flying colors. Some may not take to it; it could be argued that Steiger, much like Eli Wallach, isn't very convincing as a Mexican bandit, or that the shifting in tones is a little much, even conventional in a weird sense. But it's hard to argue the sense of control that Leone has over his environment in the film, the assuredness of style, and that at the least the parts are greater than the whole. For me, it's a film I've seen twice in one week (once to soak in and get more of the enjoyment, the second time to get even more out of it, and to notice the visual details), and I hope it gets better the next time around.

John Malloy is an IRA explosives expert, on the run in Mexico. Juan Miranda is a Mexican bandit with no interest in the political upheaval in his country and only a dream of hitting the large bank his father once failed to rob. When the two meet, Juan sees John's explosives as the way into the ban, but John has no interest and it is only when Juan frames him for the murder of some senior soldiers that John relents. Arriving in the town, the bank looks like a simple hit if they can find some way of distracting the masses of soldiers that now control the small town – luckily the revolution is in full swing and rebels are in great demand; but it is not long before Juan's idea of a simple bank robbery sees him up to his neck in a struggle that he has no interest in.

Many reviewers have said how strong the Leone formula is and I won't be able to add much to their words but for me this is a fine film mainly because it takes apart yet another of the cinema myths of the noble revolutionary fighters and has a fascinating thread of political commentary running all the way through it. It doesn't open this way though, rather it starts with Leone's usual brand of wit and confrontation between John and Juan and it all feels like it will be similar (and just as good) to some of Leone's other westerns. However, about an hour in, it becomes more interesting thanks to the rather shocking portrayal of the revolution (on both sides) and the ripping into the ideas behind it. It only adds to the basic plot and, when it becomes the main focus, the film is stronger for it, although Leone's Marxist views may be a little hard to swallow for some viewers in the west. That said, it does still work as a typical Leone western and fans of his will still love this film.

The cast is good but you gotta wonder how those accents would have been mauled if the film had not been as roundly good – certainly Coburn's attempts at an Irish brogue are not the most convincing I've heard. Other than that though he is good in the lead role, coping well with making an IRA character "likeable" without damaging the cynicism and regret that exists within him. His flashback scenes are convincing even if it is not that important to the main thrust of the film. Steiger is less serious at first but develops his character well, despite having to cope with a "road to Damascus" moment as part of it. He is consistently amusing as a character and he does tend to dominate his scenes to good effect. Support is fine but really these two men are the film and they do it very well, coping with the laughs, tension and political commentary equally well.

Overall, a typically strong film from Leone that has all his usual formula touches as well as plenty of commentary of value. The direction and use of music are as good as always and the cast cope well with the demands of the script. Reviewers who have taken this as an attack on John Ford's idea of the revolutionary Irishman are perhaps a little off since the film only confirms Ford's usual pointing out of "printing the myth" but it still has plenty of value and interesting political commentary.